It is probably because most artists that are traditional artists recognize that blues is primarily a vocal art form. Many modern players are more focused on their instrument. In the guitar world, they equate to guys like Eric Sardinas or Walter Trout. Not particularly great singers, but very talented instrumentalists.
Most traditional artists I know really focus on their singing.
It will put you in an early grave and steal all your spending money (and probably gum up you harp) but all negatives aside, I've heard some smoker's rasps that sound pretty bluesy. Maybe declining smoking rates are to blame. I think all the cut backs in music education probably hurt too. I've been listening to an amazing local singer who does things with her voice that I don't even know the words for. I sang in choir throughout high school and college and we basically learned how to sing songs by dead white men. I know some of the words for the techniques you use for that, but they never taught us growl or gravel or slurring words. I think also it's a change in the culture. Singing along with the radio in your car is very different than singing with other people on the porch or gathered around a piano. I don't think playing along with the radio prepares you for the dynamic nature of singing with other live musicians.
I will add the lack of playing live gigs. Nothing will turn you into a better singer/player than that. An average player 30 years ago would easily do 100 dates a year. Now the average player rarely leaves his house except for an open mic/safe jams, and that means you sing a few songs at most. This is further componded by the average player not having the touring bands in their towns like they use to. You would watch, learn, get to know them, and often end up in their bands. In general I have watched the musical skills go up over recent years, but the "make you move you hips" factor go down to about zilch.
Live performing in open mics/jams today is a safe zone. Nobody is sitting on the edge of the stage waiting to shoot you down. That use to be the norm at blues jams and open mics were for folk singers. Also today more and more gigs are not the main draw to the clubs. You are considered backround music. That set up will never develop the make your hips move skills because the expectations are you will not do this. Nothing will teach more about how not to connect with an audience than these kind of gigs. When I was playing fulltime such gigs would never get on our calendars. Playing all night in clubs where the patrons and owners are ready to can you in a heartbeat because there are a dozen other bands looking for your spot makes one sink or swim real quick. I also agree with many of todays blues players are more into thier instruments than the overall sound of a song, which is always based on the singing and the move your hips factor. Walter ---------- walter tore's spontobeat - a real one man band and over 1 million spontaneously created songs and growing. I record about 300 full length cds a year. " life is a daring adventure or nothing at all" - helen keller
Curtis Salgado, Paul deLay (RIP), Kim Wilson, Tad Walters, John Nemeth and James Harman are all -- in my opinion -- top notch singers. 'Course maybe they're contemporary, but not "modern."
I would love to see a Modern harmonica player that could SLAY you with their vocal performance too.
Maybe since they are so amazing on their instrument they could spend a few years REALLY learning the ART of actually singing.
Ain't never gunna cross over or get any major radio play unless you can sing as well or better then you play the harmonica,at least in this day an age!
Last Edited by on Oct 24, 2011 4:05 AM
One harp player not mentioned here is Darrell Nulisch, who is a great vocalist. One thing about the way blues has become for white musicians and white audiences is that it is far more heavy emphasis on instrumental virtuosity than vocals, whereas with the black musicians and audiences, the most IMPORTANT aspect of being a bluesman is being a great vocalist.
Just to prove a point, when BB King gets introduced to a largely black audience, like on his classic album, Live At The Regal, which is a 99% black audience, he's introduced as the world's greatest blues singer, but introduced to a white audience, he's often introduced as the world's greatest blues guitarist. ---------- Sincerely, Barbeque Bob Maglinte Boston, MA http://www.barbequebob.com CD available at http://www.cdbaby.com/cd/bbmaglinte
This is truly a silly premise for a thread, but BBQ Bob is right on with his comment about black audiences and the importance of the singer.
I consider Sugar Blue a fantastic singer, despite his modesty on that count (as expressed at last year's HCH), and he's a flaming modernist.
Hear hear for great blues singing from great harp players! Sugar Ray Norcia, Billy Branch, Mitch Kashmar, Dr. Feelgood Potts, and Tad Robinson have my vote. Kashmar and Potts will be at HCH 2012. (Ooops! Was I supposed to share that, Jeff?) At HCH, we've always made a point of trying to hire harp players who can sing. Jimi Lee is a case in point: great singer!
Cotton, arch traditionalist, has never been a great singer, but he's fun. Lazy Lester, when I saw him, wasn't much of a singer. Billy Boy Arnold is better than both of them.
Last Edited by on Oct 24, 2011 9:30 AM
Harpninja, Of your second list I think Delay was a very strong singer and could've made it on singing alone. On the first list I think Little Walter, John Lee, Rice, James and Junior as well as Butter and Wolf.
I've been listening to deLay tonight. I've changed my mind. He has a sorta tongue in cheek delivery, but when he sing-sings, it is really pretty and touching. I just associate him so much with telling jokes while he sings that I lost the memory of his actual timbre.
None of the other names wow me as singers (except Butter and Wolf). Give them an listen compared to someone like B.B. or Otis Rush. No contest that they are inferior vocalists from a technical standpoint. That doesn't mean they suck...both Walters had voices that were inferior to their harmonica playing and nowhere near the power of Otis or Muddy or B.B. Compared to their harp playing, the vocals weren't top-tier blues voices.
A non-harmonica example:
Harmonica players are worried about being like Derek Trucks when they should want to be Susan Tedeschi, lol.
Back in the day, Cotton could deliver a song quite nicely. He was a fine vocalist. Junior's late 50's/early 60's recordings didn't feature harmonica and were very powerful tunes.
Tab Robinson and Ross Bon are fabulous vocalists who also happen to be very good harp players. ---------- The Blues Photo Gallery
Last Edited by on Oct 24, 2011 8:33 PM
It may be also that great singers focus more on their vocals than their harmonica playing. Great vocalist is such a tough category to quantify. You'll get people who like vibrato and people who hate it. Is Steven Tyler a great vocalist? He plays some harp. Mick Jagger plays harp too (actually I don't like his singing style).
I think Ninja's got a point that you've got to flesh out what a great singer is. Billy Joel can sing harmony and sells a ton of records. He sings well, but doesn't have a great (or even particularly distinctive) voice. Alanis Morissette has a distinctive voice and pretty good vocal chops, but she plays harmonica only in the sense that she picks up a harmonica in the right key and blows and draws. Shakira plays harmonica. I think maybe fewer people sing in a blues style today. Maybe it's the harmonica isn't as popular an instrument so people with great voices pick up another instrument (or just sing). The current singing style seems to be fast leaps that may not leave space for a harmonica player to get any notes in.
As for great blues voices, the two that jump into my head right away are Norah Jones and Fiona Apple. I don't think either of them plays harp. (I know Norah Jones plays several instruments.) I don't think Amy Winehouse did either. (Don't you hate that. I thought of one female vocalist and my mind went blank. I can't think of any big star male vocalists I like.)
Adam, I understand why you may view this as a truly silly premise for a thread, but an informative conversation can be gleaned from others perspective of what the thread means to them.
Is it how I worded the thread that rubs you the wrong way? How would you word a thread that could address these issues? Or maybe you simply feel a discussion on "Modern Harp Playing Singers" is a mindless topic? And that's okay too.
First I want to acknowledge what an amazing and important talent YOU (Adam Gussow) are to The harmonica/music world at large! I had the pleasure of witnessing you and Mr. Satan Live up in Cleveland, Ohio when you guys were in your prime, I drove 3 hrs to experience this "new sensation" and it was worth it, BIG TIME - "I've got pictures too"-
For the record, you can run circles around me as a harp player and you are a better singer then me too. I've read your book >Mrs. Satan's Apprentice< and can say it is an EXCELLENT read, I couldn't put it down. Your music is also very special and certainly POWERFUL and POIGNANT!
My wife is a singer, so I witness up close and personal what singing is all about and for me personally, singing is far more AMAZING when done RIGHT then a spell binding solo, though I am in AWE of those too!
Great singers, especially "blues singers" when witnessed in an intimate setting is again, speaking for me only,a really POWERFUL soul touching experience. An incredible instrumentalist can also stir my emotions tremendously too.
But I suppose that I would rather >if given the choice, have someone else take the VOCAL duties over- if the frontman is WEAK in that area. IF the Mind Boggling instrumentalist can't really move an audience vocally, I would much PREFER they give those duties to a singer you has the abilities to touch an audience with only there VOICE!
I'm a white guy and - I am in the camp with how black audiences view a performer! If someone is leading a band and they can't sing, it is not very entertaining to say the least...
Love you Adam and love all the massive HARD WORK you put into letting your FANS be a part of your world!!!
@HarpNinja. I think I have to respectfully disagree with you about Junior Wells. For me he's one of the great blues singers. He recorded several early songs without any harmonica content which I think sand up as great vocal recordings.
Here's one:
This one does have harmonica on it but I think demonstrates he vocal ability.
And for some power and emotion: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cbYFn5RkX0U (Can't embed this last one).
What do you think?
Last Edited by on Oct 25, 2011 5:10 AM
@Frank: Perhaps I misunderstood you, and if so, I'm happy to apologize. Please define "modern" and "traditional." Does modern for you simply mean contemporary? Is Joe Filisko, for example, a modern or traditional player? Is Madcat Ruth a modern or traditional player? Is John Nemeth a modern or traditional player? Is Billy Branch a modern or traditional player? Is Charlie Musselwhite a modern or traditional player? I'm assuming that you'd consider Little Walter a traditional player, flaming innovator that he was in his own time. I just don't think we can assume that we know how you're using the words.
I do think that we can assume you'd call Sugar Blue a modern player and Jimmy Reed a traditional player, but beyond that, I'm honestly not sure.
I should say that I think you've gotten some good and conscientious responses here.
Paul Delay had his own style, but I think of him as a vocal stylist, not a singer--in comparison with Sugar Ray Norcia, who is a top-notch singer. I agree with HarpNinja's take on this: asking which of those players could have worked as singers alone. I think Sugar Blue is good enough to do that. He's got a very powerful tenor with excellent intonation.
Re: my singing: I've put in lots of time listening to the good stuff, and I keep trying to improve. Nobody would ever confuse me with somebody who can lead a band. But my forthcoming album is a step up, I hope.
Last Edited by on Oct 25, 2011 5:26 AM
@Baker I have jrwells and buddy guys version of stormy monday with jr singing not playing harp and buddy backing him with his always stellar playing jr sounds pretty good on vocals to me
I think Delbert Mcclinton forgotten in this thread. He is not a very good harmonica player but he has his style and he is a great and remarkable vocalist!
Thanks for suggesting that I clarify my views, and your gracious apology is happily accepted,though I was'nt fishing for one...
I define a "modern" Harmonica Player as someone who has CHANGED the GAME so to speak. You KNOW your hearing something not only very PROfessionally polished but Extremely ORIGINAL too! AND They, the player has the PATENT on their approach to how the Harmonica is PLAYED
I define a Traditional" Harmonica Player as someone who though they may have taken the level of the music up a notch or ten notches for that matter, what they are sharing with the listener a SOUPED up version of the PAST...But FOR SURE this can be every bit as entertaining if not more then the Modernists music.
Can there be MIXTURES of these two, I'm certain of that, but that's a different subject I think?
I wholeheartedly agree that the GREAT Sugar Blue, should go down in history as one of the FATHERS of Modernization of Harmonica music...
If I had a gun to my head and had to pledge allegiance to choosing "ONE" label over the other (can't choose MIXTURE) for the Players you pointed out, this is how I would see it...
Joe F. traditional Madcat traditional John N. traditional Billy B. traditional Charlie M. traditional Little W. Modern
If you want to go out and innovate you generally have to lead YOUR band to create your sound.
So you start out playing harp - your skill is focussed on that, but then when you want to push the boundaries, you have to learn to front the band. Singing in that scenario is an afterthought.
And my answer is that the traditional players are not better then modern, for example just because modern singers absorb a lot of genres and styles. My main example is Norton Buffalo he can sound like folk singer with a lot of heart and soul and like a funky singer!
Jim Liban and his early "short stuff" days is another great example. ---------- http://www.youtube.com/user/wheelharp
That's a fascinating clip by Liban [EDITED TO ADD: I mean Buffalo!] He's exactly what I would call a modern player. His most audible influence is obviously Butterfield, especially from 1:50-2:00 but he then tries to take Butterfield's style somewhere new and fresh.
As for his singing: he's trying for quite a bit more melisma than white singers usually manage. At some points his errors are laughable. At other points he nails the vocal lines and you say, "Whew! Great singer."
But a modernist through and through, in this clip. More recently, of course, he's retrenched and does Big Walter-style two-harp boogies. Like all good modernists, he knows the tradition.
Last Edited by on Oct 25, 2011 9:21 AM
When I first time listened to the "short stuff" LP, I was blown away by Jim he played ROnnie Laws sax tune on it and sing "Let's Straightnen out" as good as Latimore did! That's what I call modern harp playing and great singin :) Kudzurunner, do you mean Buffalo? Sorry to all for so many posts from me. ---------- http://www.youtube.com/user/wheelharp
Last Edited by on Oct 25, 2011 6:49 AM
Okay, if I missed him somewhere, then I retract, but I don't think I did...
Popper and Wonder....sure.
Why have we forgotten Huey Lewis here? One of the most soulful male voices of our time, and a damn good harmonica player to boot. I know he's technically a rock musician, but his harp playing is straight up blues in almost every recording and live performance he makes.
(sorry if I come off strong here, but I'm a huge fan of his.) ---------- Hawkeye Kane
His harping is still as good as ever. His vocal skills have declined a bit as he's aged (already he's 61), but I caught him at the Illinois State Fair in 2008. He's still a phenomenal entertainer and always gets the crowd jazzed. ---------- Hawkeye Kane
I've just recently heard some of Billy Gibson's stuff and he can sing pretty good. Im not really sure how he fits in to the traditional/modern deal. I like his music though.
Last Edited by on Oct 25, 2011 8:53 AM
The discussion should be - do these artists make a connection to audiences vocally or not. We can discuss who is technically better, but really, this is what it comes down to. ---------- Mike Quicksilver Custom Harmonicas VHT Special 6 Mods
@wheel: Yes, Norton Buffalo, not Jim Liban! My bad.
I'd call Billy Gibson a modern player, not a traditional player. Faster, newer, bigger. He's also an extremely good singer. I can't believe it took so long to bring up his name.
Last Edited by on Oct 25, 2011 9:20 AM
Ketch Secor is another one worth mentioning in my opinion. He's more traditional in the sense that both his playing and singing is more bluegrass than blues, but his high tenor range is impeccable and he connects with his audience very well with it. G. Love is very adept at this as well. ---------- Hawkeye Kane
I'd like to second Ninja's comment about expanding your skills. I've occasionally done lead vocals, and occasionally done some very simple back up vocals- basically singing the same thing the lead singer was singing except maybe a little harmony on the final note of the line. We just added our first 3 part harmony last week and it worked pretty well. I was really nervous, but the crowd liked it and it gave a nice lead in to the more up tempo part of the song. Sometimes I play the shaker eggs too. If my wrists would hold out I'd love to learn some piano, but they won't, so I don't. I've been thinking about making a pan flute, but laying the notes out Richter so it's easier for me to figure out. Maybe I could even make one with rows to represent bends.
I think the best example of a band that diversified would be The Beatles. By the time they broke up they were playing all sorts of crazy instruments. When they started playing a little harmonica was a big deal. By the end they were playing Indian instruments, piano, and just about anything else they could get their hands on.
I think another key is knowing what kind of voice you have. I'm lucky enough to be in a band where everyone can sing at least passingly. We have a 'lead' singer who sings lead on about half the songs. We can pick and chose based on what voice sounds best on what song. It means we can change the bands sound from tune to tune and as we work on harmony it's helping us add a new dimension to what we can do.
I think we live to a degree wearing rose coloured spectacles (or hearing aids). Most of our references to the old guys are from recordings and PA's and studios were valve. It's funny that no has mentioned equipment. You can take a pretty clean voice and dirty it up, round it out, double track and it can turn a thin reedy vocal into a rasping demon all with a little bit of overdrive and processing.
This is what we do to our harp tone, but many vocalists seem happy to use whatever setup the PA guy has and lets him set the tone. Who would let the PA guy provide their harp tone?
How much difference a great valve sound can make? Here's a couple of examples. Aretha singing The Weight with Duane Allman, (who, as an aside, in my opinion was the greatest non harp playing harp player ever. Listen to the phrasing.)
Next one. A modern track using old recording techniques. Charles Bradley. The World Is Going Up In Flames.
I fear this style of recording is becoming a lost art in this digital age.
Anyone looking to beef up their vocal tone should be looking at adding a tube preamp to their vocal arsenal.
But back to the old guys vs new guys, I'd say lifestyle, cigarettes, alcohol, age and ethnicity all have massive bearings.
And why has no one mentioned Darrell Mansfield?
Last Edited by on Oct 26, 2011 12:22 AM
Last Edited by on Oct 24, 2011 5:45 AM
